Re: Illinois as model for Democratic agenda
Marvin Gandall wrote:
I don’t know whether you are moving towards the Green party on the basis of your above comment and other recent ones.
Some attributions aside, I’m not an ultraleftist. I do recognize that there are differences between D and R (and similar party structures around the world), and they can be nontrivial. And yes there are some good people in the Dem party, esp at the local level. My personal congressman, city council rep, state assemblyperson and senator, are all pretty good. Take it up to the Senatorial level, though, and you meet abominations like Hillary Clinton & Charles Schumer. So since 2006 is a year not divisible by 4, it’s worth emphasizing the shortcomings, and thinking about an alternative. And right now I’m thinking that issue-oriented campaigns not keyed to particular candidates or parties are a very promising strategy in the US. Polls repeatedly show that the public often has good opinions on specific issues, but things get really confused when candidates and parties come into the picture. Most Americans basically have no idea what candidates stand for or even profess to stand for. Mysteries of personality and image can blur the picture, as can the often-stunning ignorance of the American masses. So I’d rather emphasize nonelectoral politics right now - e.g., living wage campaigns, single-payer initiatives, etc.
And I suspect that things aren’t as rosy in Illinois as Nathan claims. Whenever he writes about something I know well, I get dizzy from the spin. But I don’t have time to factcheck him now. It’d be nice if someone who knew Illinois well could do that.
Doug